[Old Hunch Arbat]

I get the impression that there is a *catch* in the Avoweds' commitment that could cause persistent problems (to any number of folks) and provide Skinner, or K'Azz with an elite coterie in perpetuity. My reasoning is as follows:

1. The vow confers upon those sworn to it enormous power and near immortality
2. The vow is TO K'Azz D'Vaore (sp) and AGAINST the empire and remains active so long as EITHER survives
3. The "Empire" is a political instituion and is not defined by any single individual, thus remains capable of sustaining the vow no matter who is deemed Emperor/Empress (ST, Laseen, Mallick)
4. The likliehood of that institution devolving is very slim, as it is a form of governance whose time has come. The Avowed are thus sustained by a stable political institution, regardless of leader
5. In the event that Skinner becomes Emperor, the instituion is sustained AND Skinner's Avowed remain at his side, as do K'Azz's
6. In the event that Skinner dies the Avowed remain sustained and potentially split into a single group united under K'Azz, and Ronin splinter groups allied against both K'Azz and the empire
7. If both K'Azz and Skinner die all Avowed are potentially Ronin

I believe there is some muttering amongst some of the involved NAMED characters about just his sort of problem, particularly the sustainability of both the political institution of Empire and the Avoweds' potency as a result. Must K'Azz disavow - quickly? Otherwise - whither Duke D'Avore?

OHA

Crap - sorry the title got "mushed" and should read K'Azz must disavow?

This post has been edited by Aptorian: 20 February 2009 - 11:37 PM

[Lisheo]

Title fixed. And I agree with you on all points, I have nothing to bring to the table lol.

[L'oric]

Can you add/does it work to add if Kazz becomes emperor of malaz then they can live on in perpetuity?


What I am thinking by that is that he needs to go back to his old Dukedome...doesnt he? Being as that city is no longer there then his side of the Vow is impossible to constitute. Err I think.

Sincerely

[Ain't_It_Just_]

I think in Skinner's case, the CG will find a way to keep him alive if the Vow is ended.

[Cowl's Disciple]

 Ain't_It_Just_, on Feb 21 2009, 08:56 PM, said:

I think in Skinner's case, the CG will find a way to keep him alive if the Vow is ended.

Bear in mind that the Imass (well some of them) were able to surrender their vow despite the fact that Jhagut are still around. I know there are differences and the Crimson Guard's vow is much more specific in what the end goals of the vow are but I wonder if it would be possible for Avowed to surrender the vow? It may be another way for them to get out of the tricky situation that you highlight.

[Old Hunch Arbat]

The Duke can "disavow" them - as described in RotCG. He seems to be able to release them/reject them from their vows individually. Given that he has this capability it would seem that Skinner et al would want him dead ASAP to prevent this from happening. If they remain supported by the vow and K'Azz dies then they become functionally immortal - and very powerful. This sounds a bit like Ascendance does it not? We are told that (probably) Skinner and a few of his cronies were trying to figure out a means of Ascending - perhaps this is what they decided upon as the easiest way to achieve it.(?)

OHA

[Jorram]

I actually don't think K'azz orders to the Brethren really "disavowed" Skinner, seeing as Cowl is definitely Avowed when he submits to the Deadhouse and it wouldnt make sense for K'azz to disavow just Skinner.

on the other hand, it's only what Topper thinks.....

[Wampyry]

Stoop to Kyle, pg 89


Stoop, Some six hundred swords were raised that evening. And six hundred voices spoke as one.
We vowed eternal loyalty and servitude to our Duke so long as he should live and the Empire stand.

Well, eternal loyalty and servitude are out since Skinner and Cowl betrayed K'azz about a hundred years ago. There's no bite in the Vow that punishes disoyalty. Moreover, nothing is mentioned about
what happens if K'azz dies or the Empire disolves. Their loylaty and servitude ends, but what happens to those who took the oath and remain alive..

Maybe the next book will clarify...

This post has been edited by Wampyry: 17 May 2009 - 02:13 AM

[tiam]

genuinly only pickd this up in a reread but did everyone else get that when your sworn in to the avowed ure under the vow. IE the 'avowed' IB SKinnner etc are simply the first an get the benefits but Corlo (Or COrlos on a reread of RG has just told me ) is also avowed simply in the first investiture and possibly when they have been around as long as the first avowed theyll be just as durable. If this is obvious to everyone else but i simply missed it first time round plzz tell me

[BurnedBridge]

Actually, Corlo says that's he's not avowed, but he's First Investiture, which is the next best thing...

[tiam]

exactly there all first investiture in Bars blaee i think. Even if there not one of the sailors jerome or whatever says that he knows Corlo is alot older than the 40 odd he looks meaning that hes avowed but not as avowed as Bars

[MTS]

You can't be different levels of Avowed. You're either Avowed or not. Corlo isn't an Avowed, he's First Investiture, but due to his being a mage he's long lived and stuff.

[Trull's son]

The old mage theory is most accurate, if we can refer to GotM and the mage cadre. Corlo is old, but not avowed.

[Captain Beardface]

The question I have about this is how did K'azz go from leading the CG in GotM on Genebackis to being imprisoned on that island in RotCG. There isn't that long of a span between the books, for Avowed anyways, for the CG to be scattered across the globe in some great Disporia. And the title of Disporia lends itself to a larger time frame then the 5+ years between GotM and RotCG. Plus it seems that in RotCG that the search for Prince K'Azz has been going on for a long time.

Hopefully SE and ICE will put together a concordance after they are finished with the main series, that will clear up the missing links and loopholes

[Dolorous Menhir]

 MuttonChops, on Jul 19 2009, 09:52 PM, said:

The question I have about this is how did K'azz go from leading the CG in GotM on Genebackis to being imprisoned on that island in RotCG. There isn't that long of a span between the books, for Avowed anyways, for the CG to be scattered across the globe in some great Disporia. And the title of Disporia lends itself to a larger time frame then the 5+ years between GotM and RotCG. Plus it seems that in RotCG that the search for Prince K'Azz has been going on for a long time.

Hopefully SE and ICE will put together a concordance after they are finished with the main series, that will clear up the missing links and loopholes

Either he wasn't actually there, leading the Crimson Guard forces on Genebackis, in GotM, or this is another of those annoying inconsistencies that this book has introduced. To be fair to ICE, I don't recall any absolute, explicit, can't be denied proof in GotM that K'azz was actually there. People just referred to the Crimson Guard forces as belonging to him, but we never actually saw him, even in the scenes with the leadership of the anti-Malazan forces.

[Daneel]

The K'azz on Genebackis was a fake. I remember Rake talking/musing about it, and that he had not been fooled.

[Beliar]

I not sure on the point of K'azz being fake in GoTM but i do know that there is a post on these forums from SE stating we are all better off NOT trying to put the books into set time frames and that we should just go on things happening before and after other events - To ignore dates basicly.

[MTS]

No, the K'azz on Genabackis was a fake. It added an air of legitimacy, I guess. Jorrick Sharplance was the real commander of the forces on Genabackis (and was the fake as well, I believe). In ROTCG or TTH Kallor talks about "K'azz" on Genabackis, and then adds "if I'd even met the bastard" or some such. No GotM'isms are at fault for the confusion, it was purely intentional.

[WhiskeyJackDaniels]

 Mappo's Travelling Sack, on Aug 7 2009, 06:16 AM, said:

No, the K'azz on Genabackis was a fake. It added an air of legitimacy, I guess. Jorrick Sharplance was the real commander of the forces on Genabackis (and was the fake as well, I believe). In ROTCG or TTH Kallor talks about "K'azz" on Genabackis, and then adds "if I'd even met the bastard" or some such. No GotM'isms are at fault for the confusion, it was purely intentional.

Even when they are talking about troop deployment for the upcoming season (something about leaving the Crimson Guard in the north...) and Brood mentions that he has talked to K'azz and they are in agreement about the plan. I never picked up on the fake K'azz thing, but do you think Brood would have said that just to play along with it? He's talking to Kallor or Crone at the time I believe.

[redJAKO]

You would think that the moment K'azz states that their vow is "impossible, Unta does not want us," that they would all just dissolve

K'azz did disavow Skinner, yet not Cowl, yet they both seemed to retain their vow-powers.

Who knows, maybe they can twist their vow to fighting more "tyrants" as you would have thought the Crimson Guard would have launched a number of campaigns over the last hundred years against the Empire, not just the more recent GotM and Return.